It’s telling that the only way Obama’s signature piece of legislation could pass constitutional muster is to have the Supreme Court call him a liar.
He lied. Straight up.
He didn’t change his mind, he didn’t adjust to new realities.
The bastard lied straight to your face.
And if you don’t like the way in which I reference the President:
Steady upwards track since April. Intrade has it at 75% that the law is struck down.
Good.
Posted in Economy, Health Care, Liberty, Politics: National
Tagged Barack Obama, Intrade, Obamacare, Supreme Court
One of the for profit hospitals in the Raleigh area is Wake Med.
WakeMed Health and Hospitals is a 870-bed healthcare system with multiple facilities placed around the metropolitan Raleigh, North Carolina area. WakeMed’s main campus is located on New Bern Avenue in Raleigh, North Carolina. WakeMed serves multiple counties throughout the state and specializes in a variety of services including cardiology, neurology, orthopedics, high-risk pregnancy, children’s care, trauma, physical rehabilitation and critical care transport.
In addition to providing the above services they also have emergency rooms. And being a for profit entity Wake Med is looking for ways to improve the efficiency of medical care delivery. And they have a solution.
Posted in Government, Health Care, Politics: North Carolina
Tagged Free Market, Obamacare, Regulations
The Supreme Court will have heard two of the most contentious cases that have been heard in the Obama administration by the end of this week. The first, of course, was the case of Obamacare and now the second, the Arizona immigration bill.
I find it fascinating that people are looking at how the court will or should act not based on the legal standing or constitutionality of the laws in question but rather on the policy of the law.
Posted in Government, Politics: National
Tagged Arizona, Barack Obama, Immigration, Obamacare, Supreme Court of the United States
With the end of their careers near, several Democrats are opening up about the truths of Obamacare, what it cost them, the party and possibly Obama.
The elections are right around the corner and the campaign season is right on top of us. Lot’s of people are gonna be out front and talking about the issues that might impact this season. And Obamacare certainly will get it’s chance to shine.
Posted in Elections 2012, Health Care
Tagged Barack Obama, Barney Frank, Democrats, Obamacare
I used to think mathematics is about as straight forward as you can get; a thing is a thing and it’s always that thing. But I long ago realized that there is art in play. Certain observations have a mark of individuality. I guess I shouldn’t be surprised at all that law is the same way.
There is an art.
And here, via Althouse, is one artist taking another to school:
Paul Clement will attack the expansion of Medicaid. He’s talking about whether it’s “coercive,” because if it is, it won’t fit the Spending Power. Justice Kagan wants to know why a “big gift from the Federal Government” is coercion. “The Federal Government is here saying, we are giving you a boatload of money.” Page 3. Just a big old boatload of money is coercive, Clement says confidently. But the actual bill has a “very big condition.” Kagan interrupts, trying to make her point that a big boatload of money is not coercive. What if someone offered you a job and would pay you $10 million a year. Of course, you say yes, but you’re not coerced are you. Clement lays down one of the cleverist teasers I have ever heard: “Well, I guess I would want to know where the money came from.”
“Wow. Wow.” says Kagan. Has a Supreme Court ever said “Wow. Wow” before? She can’t believe you’d do anything other than snap up that money. “I’m offering you $10 million a year to come work for me, and you are saying that this is anything but a great choice?”
Clement springs his trap: “Sure, if I told you, actually, it came from my own bank account.”
Beautiful. And somewhat ballsy.
I suspect that Supreme Court Justices don’t enjoy being mocked in court. But hey, style points none the less.
The lesson, of course, is that the Liberal doesn’t know the money is already mine.
Posted in Fun, Politics: National
Tagged Elena Kagan, Funny, Obamacare, The Supreme Court
We all live in a dangerous world. Crime all around us. We spend untold amounts of money keeping ourselves safe. It might be stronger locks on our doors, cameras in the roof, alarm systems in the house.
I have a safe; two even.
And then we spend money on public infrastructure. We pay the local police, the state police and even federal law enforcement officials.
Given that private ownership of guns reduces crime, and that we are all living in a crime market, I would like to see the federal government mandate gun ownership.
Posted in Government, Liberty, Politics: National
Tagged Health Care, Individual Mandate, Obamacare
The argument goes something like this:
By allowing people to make their own decisions, they pass costs on to other American citizens who make better and more correct decisions. Therefore, we can mandate that what we feel is a better and more correct decision; health insurance.
That’s the Left. That’s Obama. That’s what people who claim to love liberty want to embrace. That a beneficent government, acting in our best interests, can mandate behavior.
I’ve challenged this line of thought by asking if we could mandate blueberries. See, blueberries are one of the most healthy foods available. It consistently ranks in the top 5; heck, top 3. People who eat blueberries are healthier than people who don’t.
There is little scientific evidence to dispute this. If any.
Yet we know that we cannot mandate that people buy blueberries.
But if this health care mandate goes through, we are saying that the government CAN mandate blueberries. Heck, we then admit that the government mandate that we GROW blueberries.
And yet this argument has been ignored.
Antonin Scalia, asked if the government might require Americans to buy broccoli or automobiles. Returning to the limits thing, Scalia asked, “If the government can do this, what else can it … do?”
Sub green for blue and the argument is the same.
What can the government NOT mandate?
The government should be a ref.
I’m reading a NY Times article on the lead up to the Supreme Court hearing of the case; some interesting facts surrounding a 1987 ruling regarding taxes and lawsuits.
Anyway, I come across this anecdotal story:
Some activists came with their own stories. Henrik Erslev, 58, a carpenter from Maryland, said he had come out to support the bill because his daughter, who just turned 26, was allowed to stay on his insurance policy through a cyst removal last year that Mr. Erslev said would have forced her into bankruptcy.
Now, assuming his daughter would have had to obtain her own insurance, something she’ll have to do in a year anyway, how much would it have cost her?